Abstract

Recently, a taxonomic work was published concerning the existence of a new cryptic species of green anaconda. The authors justified the recognition of a phylogenetic lineage as a new species, which they named Eunectes akayima, based on genetic and geographical distribution differences. Regardless of whether the evidence provided to justify the recognition of this new species is sufficient, the article in question violates fundamental aspects of the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature, such as the principle of priority and the rules for the designation lectotypes. Furthermore, the authors make unjustified assumptions regarding the type locality of Eunectes murinus, compromising the integrity of their nomenclatural actions. Here, we present a critique of this work grounded in the application of the rules of zoological nomenclature, leading to the synonymizing of the recently described species.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call